- Posts
- 34
- Likes
- 39
TexasMather
·I know this ruffles some feathers, but I just can't help myself. Most folks on this site know the incredible history of both watches, so I won't recount the origins in detail because there are much better summaries. However, there are a few things that really stand out to me and keep me from ever falling in love with a Daytona.
1. The history: the Daytona has "Cosmograph" printed on it because the early Rolexes had a moonphase and a calendar function, neither are things that the modern Daytona even utilizes! Moreover, the "Cosmograph" term evokes the concept of cosmonauts and space, which the Omega Speedmaster clearly dominates that entire discussion. We all know the Daytona was originally passed over by NASA who ultimately selected the Speedmaster to make history. Yet Rolex keeps the "Cosmograph" label on the Daytona to this day, because ....???
2. The modern 3861 and especially the recent remake of the 321 have exhibition casebacks to appreciate the beautiful movements. Daytonas have a closed back which is just inferior in my opinion (the platinum Daytona notwithstanding, but I suppose it ought to have something special about it for that price beyond simply using platinum).
Boring:
Beautiful:
3. The Daytona is not self-consistent in the 9 o'clock subdial. The subdial has the numbers with their bottom edge on the inner track of the subdial. Except for the 6! I know about the whole "inverted 6" stuff back when Zenith movements were used. I don't care. This is just bad design to me, and offends the beautiful symmetry that could have been. For clarity, I drew what "would be" self-consistent. Of course, that would be probably confusing for too many people.
4. The Daytona doesn't use lume on the chronograph hand. The Speedmaster does. Now I understand that it's rare that you need to time anything while in the dark, but still. It's the little things that matter and the Speedmaster gets that one right as well.
5. Screw down pushers are awfully bulky and slow you down: If you actually want to use your chronograph, then having to unscrew the pushers is annoying. I'll make an exception for people who want to swim/dive with their watch, because a screw down pusher makes sense in that case. But I don't think anyone would consider the Daytona a dive watch, go get a Seamaster or a Submariner. The Speedmaster and the Daytona were originally racing watches with chronographs used for timing laps on a track. Hard to imagine some race car driver at the Daytona taking the time to unscrew his pushers while driving around the track. The Daytona is not consistent with it's own history!
The Speedmaster is objectively the superior watch. I won't even mention the cultural differences, marketing differences, or financial differences. Those are outside the scope of the watch itself.
End of rant. Thank you for reading.
1. The history: the Daytona has "Cosmograph" printed on it because the early Rolexes had a moonphase and a calendar function, neither are things that the modern Daytona even utilizes! Moreover, the "Cosmograph" term evokes the concept of cosmonauts and space, which the Omega Speedmaster clearly dominates that entire discussion. We all know the Daytona was originally passed over by NASA who ultimately selected the Speedmaster to make history. Yet Rolex keeps the "Cosmograph" label on the Daytona to this day, because ....???
2. The modern 3861 and especially the recent remake of the 321 have exhibition casebacks to appreciate the beautiful movements. Daytonas have a closed back which is just inferior in my opinion (the platinum Daytona notwithstanding, but I suppose it ought to have something special about it for that price beyond simply using platinum).
Boring:
Beautiful:
3. The Daytona is not self-consistent in the 9 o'clock subdial. The subdial has the numbers with their bottom edge on the inner track of the subdial. Except for the 6! I know about the whole "inverted 6" stuff back when Zenith movements were used. I don't care. This is just bad design to me, and offends the beautiful symmetry that could have been. For clarity, I drew what "would be" self-consistent. Of course, that would be probably confusing for too many people.
4. The Daytona doesn't use lume on the chronograph hand. The Speedmaster does. Now I understand that it's rare that you need to time anything while in the dark, but still. It's the little things that matter and the Speedmaster gets that one right as well.
5. Screw down pushers are awfully bulky and slow you down: If you actually want to use your chronograph, then having to unscrew the pushers is annoying. I'll make an exception for people who want to swim/dive with their watch, because a screw down pusher makes sense in that case. But I don't think anyone would consider the Daytona a dive watch, go get a Seamaster or a Submariner. The Speedmaster and the Daytona were originally racing watches with chronographs used for timing laps on a track. Hard to imagine some race car driver at the Daytona taking the time to unscrew his pushers while driving around the track. The Daytona is not consistent with it's own history!
The Speedmaster is objectively the superior watch. I won't even mention the cultural differences, marketing differences, or financial differences. Those are outside the scope of the watch itself.
End of rant. Thank you for reading.
